TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Kinoulton
Super User
Super User
Posts: 11357
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:13 pm
Location: East Riding

TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Kinoulton » Mon May 09, 2011 1:14 am

Call it Wendyball, take the mick, whatever.

But the well put together football programmes paid good attention to the relegation plights of West Ham, etc, the European aspirations of Tottenham, Liverpool, etc and all the other periphery.

But it was clear that Man Utd's quest for the title, and QPR's confirmation of Championship winners notwithstanding the aborted points deduction, was paramount.

Rugby?

Pathetic.

Tigers' dramatic claim of top spot was reduced to the least importnat game of the campaign and had a bundle of tries condensed into about 60 seconds of incoherent action.

Pathetic pathetic pathetic.

Je suis peed off, monsieur,
Kicks and scrums and ruck and roll.....Is all my brain and body need!

Tiger_in_Birmingham
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1720
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:55 pm
Location: Birmingham / Bangor Uni

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Tiger_in_Birmingham » Mon May 09, 2011 7:22 am

I think ITV had a difficult job to do this week in so far as 5 of the 6 games had something riding on it - but they missed the glaringly obvious

Wasps vs Exeter was the only game where nothing was at stake - that should have had the 60sec review

DickyP
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2815
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:14 pm
Location: Newark

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by DickyP » Mon May 09, 2011 7:40 am

Of course football has better coverage - there's far, far more money involved. Let's put it in perspective: Tigers who are the best supported team in the UK by some stretch had a gate of 24,000 on Saturday for an important game, whereas 2¼ hours earlier a meaningless lower division (NPower Championship) game at the Walkers drew 24,860. All the Premier League games got bigger gates than us (except Bolton 22K), and most of them got 50% more even though only Man U (75,000+) of the big teams was at home. Plenty of Premier League footballers get between 1½ to 2 times the AP salary cap on their own!

Our sport, infinitely better than wendyball though it quite clearly is, is a minority one. In my opinion if that means we avoid the worse excesses of the other game then long may we remain so.
For when the One Great Scorer comes to write against your name,
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."

Daveyboy
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1740
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: On the fosse

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Daveyboy » Mon May 09, 2011 9:36 am

We watched the ITV coverage of Tigers' match last night and thought "Is that it?"

Good job we went to the game, really.
Today is yesterday's tomorrow.

Daveyboy
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1740
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: On the fosse

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Daveyboy » Mon May 09, 2011 9:38 am

As posted elsewhere on the forum, this clip was significantly better than the ITV coverage.

http://www.espn.co.uk/rugbyunion/sport/ ... 89454.html
Today is yesterday's tomorrow.

yellow_balaclava_hunter
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 880
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:22 pm

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by yellow_balaclava_hunter » Mon May 09, 2011 7:22 pm

Ah those pints again.

:drinkers: :drinkers: :drinkers: :drinkers:

Football is followed more than Rugby. It's not something that worries me.

The 24,000 was our capacity so we'll never know how many extra could have turned up.

What worries me more was at 8PM when I checked the news sites, the Leicester match wasn't even part of the Rugby headlines despite us coming back from 15 points down to finish top on the last game of the season.
Excuse me. Where do I get a yellow balaclava from?
I asked Gavin Henson if they sold them at Matalan but he said they didn't because they messed his hair up.

kpb
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:34 am

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by kpb » Mon May 09, 2011 7:45 pm

What bothers me the most is the local coverage Tigers get,especially on the radio.I would say that it is 50/50 when it comes to support for either City or Tigers yet them at the Walkers always seem to get preference over Tigers who end up on the digital service,its only when City are not playing then we get lucky and can listen on FM.

ITV highlights have been poor all season,bring back Rugby Special on the BBC.
POSITIVE MENTAL ATTITUDE.

POSTIGER
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2962
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:48 am
Location: In the office pretending to work

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by POSTIGER » Mon May 09, 2011 9:03 pm

I think that Sky's coverage is generally of a good standard although it is frustrating when there is no time for post-match analysis (usually because a football match is about to start!).

ITV's coverage is poor but then they rely on Sky for the highlights and they pay a lot more than you probably think for those 30 seconds.
I saw Marika Vunibaka play

MelChannerFan
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:42 am
Location: Herts

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by MelChannerFan » Tue May 10, 2011 4:16 pm

I keep on about this hoping that there will eventually be a groundswell of support to convince Tigers management/Premier Rugby.

Living in the Rugby desert of Surrey, I pay for both Sky and Espn and am pleased with coverage so far of Tigers matches.

However, a few years ago, the people who recorded matches for the clubs had an excellent scheme where for a fiver a time you could receive a DVD of the weekend match on Tuesday - no commentary. This was stopped, I believe because of the so called "highlights packages" - what rubbish they are!.

How I would love to see the full DVD of Saturday's match!

DickyP
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2815
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:14 pm
Location: Newark

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by DickyP » Tue May 10, 2011 5:09 pm

MelChannerFan wrote:I keep on about this hoping that there will eventually be a groundswell of support to convince Tigers management/Premier Rugby.

Living in the Rugby desert of Surrey, I pay for both Sky and Espn and am pleased with coverage so far of Tigers matches.

However, a few years ago, the people who recorded matches for the clubs had an excellent scheme where for a fiver a time you could receive a DVD of the weekend match on Tuesday - no commentary. This was stopped, I believe because of the so called "highlights packages" - what rubbish they are!.

How I would love to see the full DVD of Saturday's match!
So would I and I was there! I always enjoy watching the games I've seen 'for real' later in slow time, as I get a bit over-excited when I'm there.
For when the One Great Scorer comes to write against your name,
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."

Purebob
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:53 pm
Location: Dudley

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Purebob » Tue May 10, 2011 6:14 pm

Yeah I'd love a DVD scheme like that. At matches I sometimes can't see who is doing what. I watch games and can't tell you who scored sometimes.

Bill W (2)
Super User
Super User
Posts: 14868
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:23 pm
Location: Essex

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Bill W (2) » Tue May 10, 2011 6:25 pm

Purebob wrote:Yeah I'd love a DVD scheme like that. At matches I sometimes can't see who is doing what. I watch games and can't tell you who scored sometimes.
Drink less beer?

:smt016
Still keeping the faith!

Purebob
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:53 pm
Location: Dudley

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by Purebob » Tue May 10, 2011 7:20 pm

Sadly I don't drink mister W ! Given up coming up a year now :D

DickyP
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2815
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:14 pm
Location: Newark

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by DickyP » Tue May 10, 2011 7:45 pm

Purebob wrote:Sadly I don't drink mister W ! Given up coming up a year now :D
Tiger's better win then - otherwise how else can you drown your sorrows? :smt017
For when the One Great Scorer comes to write against your name,
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."

westwinds31
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4505
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:26 am

Re: TV's Football Coverage is far better than that of Rugby.

Post by westwinds31 » Tue May 10, 2011 8:45 pm

Not sure which channel it is, I'm thinking Sky, but the super slow motion shots of a tackle, break or scrummage is very, very annoying. These are normally shown during a break in play, but often they return to live play and they've missed the line out or scrum and you see the ball flying out to the backs with no idea who won the ball etc ....arrrrggghhhhh !

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests